Atheists: What would be evidence of God’s existence?

[Trailblazer]

There is no time limit on this being wrong, I'm not sure why you expect these claims to go unchallenged.

I suggest you spend your time challenging what you think are claims instead of arguing about whether they are claims or beliefs. I am not even reading your posts anymore, I just saw this line in passing through answering my friend @CG Didymus.

 

[Trailblazer]

And no, I don't believe Baha'u'llah is accurate in some of the things he said. That is why I don't believe he is the return of every promised one of every religion. He said Ishmael, not Isaac, was taken to be sacrificed? He says that Noah was 950 years old, but in his version of the story, he doesn't mention the flood... which was the main event in the Bible version of the story. To me, why change a story that was probably fictional anyway? It was fiction. But, if Baha'u'llah is saying that those stories were true, but that the Bible writers changed them, then that makes the Bible writers liars. Then the Bible is not the "greatest" testimony.

Baha'u'llah was not saying the Bible stories were true, quite the contrary!

“Mention hath been made in certain books of a deluge which caused all that existed on earth, historical records as well as other things, to be destroyed. Moreover, many cataclysms have occurred which have effaced the traces of many events. Furthermore, among existing historical records differences are to be found, and each of the various peoples of the world hath its own account of the age of the earth and of its history. Some trace their history as far back as eight thousand years, others as far as twelve thousand years. To any one that hath read the book of Jük it is clear and evident how much the accounts given by the various books have differed.

Please God thou wilt turn thine eyes towards the Most Great Revelation, and entirely disregard these conflicting tales and traditions.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 174-175

No, logically speaking, that there are mistakes in the Bible only means that the Bible authors got it wrong. Why on earth would you expect everything in the Bible to be right, it was not even written by a prophet let alone a Messenger/Manifestation of God. By contrast, whatever Baha'u'llah wrote came from God so it is inerrant. that is the Baha'i Belief, you can accept it or reject it.

“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon My couch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.”
Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57

 

[Sheldon]

I suggest you spend your time challenging what you think are claims instead of arguing about whether they are claims or beliefs.

I am challenging your claim that an assertion of a belief is not a claim, that is axiomatic.

I am not even reading your posts anymore, I just saw this line in passing through answering my friend @CG Didymus.

That is of course your call, but I don't really care, as this is a public debate forum, and you are not alone in reading these forums. Even tedious arguments in semantics can have value if someone finds them edifying. The fact you choose to remain ignorant of your misconception of semantics here is again your choice, but others may care not to make similar erroneous claim. I know I do, so if someone could disavow me with a demonstration of sufficient evidence I would read it, as I am grateful to learn when I am inevitably wrong at some point. Though I am dubious it is here, for the reasons already stated.

 

[CG Didymus]

Baha'u'llah was not saying the Bible stories were true, quite the contrary!

“Mention hath been made in certain books of a deluge which caused all that existed on earth, historical records as well as other things, to be destroyed. Moreover, many cataclysms have occurred which have effaced the traces of many events. Furthermore, among existing historical records differences are to be found, and each of the various peoples of the world hath its own account of the age of the earth and of its history. Some trace their history as far back as eight thousand years, others as far as twelve thousand years. To any one that hath read the book of Jük it is clear and evident how much the accounts given by the various books have differed.

Please God thou wilt turn thine eyes towards the Most Great Revelation, and entirely disregard these conflicting tales and traditions.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 174-175

No, logically speaking, that there are mistakes in the Bible only means that the Bible authors got it wrong. Why on earth would you expect everything in the Bible to be right, it was not even written by a prophet let alone a Messenger/Manifestation of God. By contrast, whatever Baha'u'llah wrote came from God so it is inerrant. that is the Baha'i Belief, you can accept it or reject it.

“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon My couch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.”
Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57

I'm fine with most all Scriptures of most all religions to be religious myth. But is that what Baha'is believe? There are quotes that make the Bible out to be the Word of God, and if this "certain" books includes the Bible then it's not the word of God but the word of men. And that is one problem I have with the Baha'i Faith they seem to "believe" and don't believe in the different religions and their Scriptures at the same time.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm fine with most all Scriptures of most all religions to be religious myth. But is that what Baha'is believe? There are quotes that make the Bible out to be the Word of God, and if this "certain" books includes the Bible then it's not the word of God but the word of men. And that is one problem I have with the Baha'i Faith they seem to "believe" and don't believe in the different religions and their Scriptures at the same time.

All Baha'is do not view the Bible in the same way and we are free to view it however we want to. I have already posted the Baha'i view on the Bible but here it is again:

Introduction

Although Bahá'ís universally share a great respect for the Bible, and acknowledge its status as sacred literature, their individual views about its authoritative status range along the full spectrum of possibilities. At one end there are those who assume the uncritical evangelical or fundamentalist-Christian view that the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God. At the other end are Bahá'ís attracted to the liberal, scholarly conclusion that the Bible is no more than a product of complex historical and human forces. Between these extremes is the possibility that the Bible contains the Word of God, but only in a particular sense of the phrase 'Word of God' or in particular texts. I hope to show that a Bahá'í view must lie in this middle area, and can be defined to some degree.

Conclusion

The Bahá'í viewpoint proposed by this essay has been established as follows: The Bible is a reliable source of Divine guidance and salvation, and rightly regarded as a sacred and holy book. However, as a collection of the writings of independent and human authors, it is not necessarily historically accurate. Nor can the words of its writers, although inspired, be strictly defined as 'The Word of God' in the way the original words of Moses and Jesus could have been. Instead there is an area of continuing interest for Bahá'í scholars, possibly involving the creation of new categories for defining authoritative religious literature.

A Baháí View of the Bible

 

[Tiberius]

The human teachings said man as a babies mother ovah ovary had been healed in God heavenly conditions. Baby life of man in DNA given back.

Human mother highest conscious life reviewed.

The conditions cooling of gases by ice and water the teaching.

The UFO God ark stone attack by breaking gods mountain laws. Mountain not a volcano where theists discussing gods heavens as a spirit began. Lied.

Gods earth hell. Satanists theist liars.

Evolution immaculate the only earth God accepted beginning.

No other status was allowed.

As the coldest heavenly state spirit kept life safe from burning.

Ice one saviour returned and renewed end of each year a balance.

Water melt flooded ice raining flooding was still in fact cooling the heavens ancient gas burning. Flooding rain also a saviour.

Heated gases had disallowed human life genetic blood type to exist. By heavenly support. Holy life blood taught.

As reptile egg layers dinosaurs owned cold blood in an extremely hot heavens status.

What you knew in human sciences.

Holy life with god origins the human holy mother of human babies.

Ignored as usual.

Holy human mother the human creator life saved continuance a science teaching about holy life with god. Evolution cooled gas status.

This appears to be nothing more than random words strung together. I can find no meaning within it.

 

[rational experiences]

This appears to be nothing more than random words strung together. I can find no meaning within it.

You mean I'm not giving you scientific identification? Information correct life and the heavens on planet earth is not science.

Science never owned why the heavens cooled or why DNA changed as the heavens cooled.

 

[Subduction Zone]

This appears to be nothing more than random words strung together. I can find no meaning within it.

You were expecting something else?

 

[Tiberius]

I am doing anything but clinging but I cannot disbelieve in something that I know is the truth.

Why would I want to believe in a God I do not even like?
Why would I want to believe in a religion that has so many requirements for which I get nothing in return?
I want to be a Baha'i like I want a hole in the head.

Except you don't KNOW. Don't confuse certainty with KNOWING.

God cannot be measured because God is not physical.

Neither is a magnetic field. We can measure that just fine.

Fair enough. Many people look at the evidence against the belief when they are investigating it, before they join the religion. Many Baha'is did that, they compared the Baha'i Faith to other religions or looked at the evidence against the belief.

And did you do that? What sources that argued against Baha'i being true did you look at?

I was not referring to looking only at things that support my view of God vs. no God, I was talking about where i would get accurate information abut the religion in question. A Christian would not look at the Qur'an to get information about Christianity.

There are plenty of sources regarding Christianity that argue against it being true that a Christian could look at.

The simple fact is that for any religious position, there are arguments for and against, and the only way to get an unbiased view is to look at both sides.

There are no criteria set by the Baha'i council.

Then you lied to me.

I specifically asked you if there were any criteria set by the Baha'i council (post 1933), and you answered YES (post 1945).

No, that is illogical because there is no reason to think that humans would agree on religion. Do people agree on politics? Politics exist in reality.

But no one disputes the existence of politics, do they?

The existence of politics is not in dispute, so don't try to pretend it's the same thing.

However, 93% of the world population agree that a God or gods exist.

According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450 to 500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population), with China having the most atheists in the world (200 million convinced atheists). Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia

I am not saying that means that God exists so please do not accuse me of the ad populum fallacy.

Then why did you bring it up at all?

I was not raised in any religion so I had no confirmation bias since I had no belief in God before that. I was starting from scratch.

So what? Do you think that makes you immune to confirmation bias?

 

[Tiberius]

I do not know what you mean by accuracy.

You are unsure what "accurate" means?

REALLY?

If you mean it does not prove that God exists, yes and no. If you use your logical reasoning then you would ask yourself how religion could be the cause of great civilizations and the motivating force behind so much human behavior if there was no real God behind it.

So what? People have been doing crazy stuff for ages over things that aren't real. What do you think this proves?

Please explain how you think I am doing that. Just because I believe that the previous Messengers were sent by God that does not mean I am trying to make them FIT into the Baha'i Faith. Every Messenger has His own distinct mission from God and founds a new religion. All these religions are like chapters in one continually unfolding Book of God, all separate but connected in, all part of God's Purpose for man.

Your faith literally tells you to believe that they were previous messengers from God, and you accept that claim.

I said: "All of the Writings of Baha'u'llah are not claims but I believe they are all truth."
What I have is a belief.

Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=claim+means

Claim: to say that something is true or is a fact, although you cannot prove it and other people might not believe it: claim

Belief:
1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
"his belief in the value of hard work"

2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
"a belief in democratic politics"
https://www.google.com/search

Belief:
the feeling of being certain that something exists or is true:
His belief in God gave him hope during difficult times.
Recent scandals have shaken many people's belief in (= caused people to have doubts about) politicians.
belief

Yes, the writings of Mr B are claims. They are claims that you believe to be true.

 

[Tiberius]

You mean I'm not giving you scientific identification? Information correct life and the heavens on planet earth is not science.

Science never owned why the heavens cooled or why DNA changed as the heavens cooled.

No, I mean that your sentences do not fit into any grammatical English structure and thus carry no discernable meaning.

 

[rational experiences]

No, I mean that your sentences do not fit into any grammatical English structure and thus carry no discernable meaning.

That is not how you first expressed your belief. By reading what I write

As English is using English words. Grammar is a taught schooling.

If I cannot use my irradiated brain functions it is proven as I was grammatically an A standard English student. Then it is not my fault.

Advised you already that if science chooses to force change. Then change means is changed.

You wanted Jesus changed then not changed.

Gases are the same. Some of its mass gets changed whilst the rest remained the same.

I am not a gas. I am bio physical ever changing.

 

[Tiberius]

That is not how you first expressed your belief. By reading what I write

As English is using English words. Grammar is a taught schooling.

If I cannot use my irradiated brain functions it is proven as I was grammatically an A standard English student. Then it is not my fault.

Advised you already that if science chooses to force change. Then change means is changed.

You wanted Jesus changed then not changed.

Gases are the same. Some of its mass gets changed whilst the rest remained the same.

I am not a gas. I am bio physical ever changing.

Yeah, I have no idea what you are trying to say.

It's not enough to have an idea. You must also be able to communicate it clearly. If you can't communicate your idea clearly, then it doesn't matter how good your idea is.

 

[Trailblazer]

Except you don't KNOW. Don't confuse certainty with KNOWING.

I do know, and there is not a damn thing you can so about it.

Neither is a magnetic field. We can measure that just fine.

God is not a magnetic field, sorry.

And did you do that? What sources that argued against Baha'i being true did you look at?

Bahá'í Faith: Its History and Teachings, The by William Miller

It's laughable. A Christian misrepresenting the history of the Baha'i Faith in an effort to discredit it, hilarious.

There are plenty of sources regarding Christianity that argue against it being true that a Christian could look at.

The simple fact is that for any religious position, there are arguments for and against, and the only way to get an unbiased view is to look at both sides.

I have looked at them. Before i joined this forum four years ago I was posting on an atheist forum and the forum owner presented many anti-Baha'i sources that I looked at.

But no one disputes the existence of politics, do they?

The existence of politics is not in dispute, so don't try to pretend it's the same thing.

I was not referring to the existence of politics. I said that people disagree about religions (which ones are best) just as they disagree about politics (which political party is best).

"No, that is illogical because there is no reason to think that humans would agree on religion. Do people agree on politics."

So what? Do you think that makes you immune to confirmation bias?

What makes you immune to confirmation bias?

 

[Trailblazer]

Your faith literally tells you to believe that they were previous messengers from God, and you accept that claim.

My faith teaches (not tells me to believe) that there were previous Messengers from God and I believe it... So what?

Yes, the writings of Mr B are claims. They are claims that you believe to be true.

There are claims in the Writings of Baha'u'llah and I believe they are true... So what?

 

[Sheldon]

I have with the Baha'i Faith they seem to "believe" and don't believe in the different religions and their Scriptures at the same time.

That and being unable to demsonrate anything tangible, or any objective evidence to support any deity. The beliefs are a bit too woolly to pin down to be honest.

As with other religions there are vague platitudes peppered with the word love, but when questioned just like the adherents of other religions, they insist you immerse yourself in the belief to discover some esoteric truth.

 

[Sheldon]

This appears to be nothing more than random words strung together. I can find no meaning within it.

I was worried I was having a stroke when I first read it. Maybe it's some sort of code?

 

[Sheldon]

You mean I'm not giving you scientific identification?

No he means it's gibberish, incomprehensible gobbledygook.

Information correct life and the heavens on planet earth is not science.

Science never owned why the heavens cooled or why DNA changed as the heavens cooled.

Well there you go, meaningless?

 

[Sheldon]

That is not how you first expressed your belief. By reading what I write

As English is using English words. Grammar is a taught schooling.

Random capital letters in the middle of a sentence usually have alarm bells ringing for me.

Advised you already that if science chooses to force change. Then change means is changed.

You wanted Jesus changed then not changed.

Gases are the same. Some of its mass gets changed whilst the rest remained the same.

I am not a gas. I am bio physical ever changing.

Gibberish.

 

[Tiberius]

I do know, and there is not a damn thing you can so about it.

You are CERTAIN, but until you can provide evidence to back up your position, then you cannot claim to KNOW.

I can just as easily claim to KNOW that Baha'i is false.

God is not a magnetic field, sorry.

Irrelevant. You specified something non-physical, and I gave you an example.

Bahá'í Faith: Its History and Teachings, The by William Miller

It's laughable. A Christian misrepresenting the history of the Baha'i Faith in an effort to discredit it, hilarious.

I won't argue that it got objective facts about Baha'i wrong. But if it was that poorly researched, how can you conclude that it would be a valid argument against Baha'i?

That would be like me claiming to have looked at sources that say Star Trek is great and sources that say Star trek is terrible, but the only source I looked at that says Star Trek is terrible was written by someone who's never watched TV and thinks Star Trek is the show where Luke Skywalker teams up with the Cylons to fight the Daleks at Hogwarts. I's hardly a balanced viewpoint, is it?

I have looked at them. Before i joined this forum four years ago I was posting on an atheist forum and the forum owner presented many anti-Baha'i sources that I looked at.

Cool.

I was not referring to the existence of politics. I said that people disagree about religions (which ones are best) just as they disagree about politics (which political party is best).

The difference is that we can present repeatable, testable and verifiable evidence that politics exists, and that when we discuss what political parties are best, there actually are political parties that exist in reality.

Can't do that with God - and THAT was the point I was making.

What makes you immune to confirmation bias?

I'm not.

But I at least recognise that I could be susceptible and take measures to make sure that I can eliminate such bias - like making sure that the evidence for my position is testable and verifiable by others.